Deciphering The Army’s Dual Stance on the Quartet

Deciphering The Army’s Dual Stance on the Quartet:

Embracing Peace While Mobilising for War

By Professor Mekki Medani El ShiblyExecutive Director, Cognisance Centre for Strategic Studies (CCSS)

The international and regional efforts to de-escalate the war in Sudan are moving forward cautiously but deliberately. At the centre of this process lies the Quartet Roadmap, a framework jointly endorsed by the United States, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates, which lays out a realistic two-phase timeline:

• a three-month humanitarian truce, followed by
• a nine-month comprehensive ceasefire, paving the way for a civilian transition.

Yet, many observers still conflate these two stages, truce and ceasefire, though their nature, objectives, and enforcement mechanisms differ fundamentally. Understanding this distinction is crucial for assessing the prospects of peace in Sudan and the responsibilities of each party under the Quartet’s framework.

The Truce: A Humanitarian Pause to Build Confidence

The truce, as defined by the Quartet, is a limited humanitarian window lasting three months. It seeks to halt hostilities in designated areas to enable the delivery of aid, restore essential services, and facilitate the evacuation and burial of victims.

During this period, monitoring teams, supported by satellite imagery and unmanned drones, are deployed to verify compliance and detect violations. The truce is not yet a political settlement; it is, rather, an opportunity for the fractured civilian forces to prove their capacity to manage humanitarian and administrative affairs in safe zones and to build trust with the international community.

The Ceasefire: A Political and Security Commitment

The nine-month ceasefire phase represents a transition from humanitarian calm to a structured political and security agreement. This stage includes the restructuring and redeployment of armed forces and the establishment of a hybrid monitoring mechanism under the joint supervision of the Quartet, the African Union, and the United Nations.

This hybrid mechanism combines on-the-ground observers with advanced technologies, satellite imaging, drones, and local reporting to issue monthly joint assessments on the compliance of both the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF).

Reconciling the Army’s Peace Rhetoric with Military Mobilisation

The Sudanese Defence Minister’s statement, affirming the army’s acceptance of peace while maintaining general mobilisation, sparked a national debate: can continued mobilisation coexist with a declared truce?

Technically, the Quartet’s roadmap allows for defensive readiness during the truce period, but prohibits offensive action or any shift in the balance of power. Verification mechanisms, backed by satellite and drone surveillance, ensure that any unauthorised troop movements or preparations for attack are detected and reported.

However, once the comprehensive ceasefire begins, mobilisation must cease entirely. Troop restructuring, demobilisation, and reintegration fall under international and civilian oversight. Thus, the Defence Minister’s remarks should be read as a political message aimed at domestic hardliners, not as a repudiation of the Quartet’s conditions. By the time the ceasefire phase begins, even rhetorical mobilisation will lose legitimacy.

Economic Oversight as an Enforcement Tool

To implement both the truce and the ceasefire, the Quartet should activate a Sudan Resource Trade Oversight Committee (S-RTOC), an economic and institutional mechanism to monitor exports of gold, livestock, crops, and fuel.

This committee would link economic access to military compliance: those who respect the truce and ceasefire retain export privileges and access to foreign currency; those who violate them lose both. In this way, economic transparency becomes a non-military instrument of enforcement, reinforcing the Quartet’s peace framework without coercive force.

Parallel Civilian Action: Building the Alternative

Neither the truce nor the ceasefire is an end in itself. They are means to restore the civilian foundation of the state. During the truce, Sudan’s civilian actors must use the three-month window to unify their ranks and craft a coherent national project for democratic transition.

In the ceasefire phase, over nine months, they must consolidate functional governance institutions, preparing to assume authority once the army and RSF withdraw from political and economic life.

A critical task during this period is to prevent infiltration by Islamist loyalists or remnants of the former regime, forces that have repeatedly derailed past transitions and ignited the April war to block the Framework Agreement. The Quartet Roadmap explicitly warns against their return.

National Safeguards Against Sabotage

The peace process faces a real threat from networks of spoilers that profit from instability and might exploit any institutional vacuum to reignite conflict. Safeguards are therefore essential:

• activating the joint Quartet–AU monitoring mechanism,
• deploying satellite and drone verification systems,
• taking swift financial action against suspicious transactions, and
• involving local resistance committees in reporting violations.

Political leaders and military commanders alike must turn peace rhetoric into operational reality: the truce is not a pretext for renewed mobilisation, but a window to rebuild Sudan away from the language of arms.

Conclusion: Understanding the Roadmap and the Civilian Horizon

The Quartet’s roadmap was not designed to grant victory to any party, but to halt Sudan’s bleeding and redirect its energy toward rebuilding the state on civil and institutional foundations.

Its two interconnected phases, a three-month humanitarian truce and a nine-month ceasefire, are stepping stones toward a civilian transition. The difference between them is crucial:

• The truce is a temporary humanitarian mechanism that freezes hostilities and protects civilians.
• The ceasefire is a political–security accord that cements peace and prepares for a civilian-led government.

In this light, the Defence Minister’s remarks about continued mobilisation should be seen as a tactical domestic gesture rather than a breach of the Quartet’s framework. The monitoring system, through satellite data, drones, and international reporting, makes it nearly impossible to hide violations.

The real challenge, however, lies not only in military compliance but in civilian readiness. Sudan’s civil forces must seize these twelve months to unify, rebuild legitimacy, and demonstrate their capacity for responsible governance.

Meanwhile, Islamist networks must be prevented from hijacking the transition or sabotaging peace under new guises. The Quartet’s roadmap offers a clear ladder: the truce opens the door to humanitarian relief; the ceasefire builds trust; and the civilian transition lays the foundation for a modern state.

Sudan’s future depends on balanced synergies:

• SAF and RSF withdraw from politics,
• civilians who prove capable of governance, and
• an international community that ensures both live up to their commitments.

Only through this triad of discipline, trust, and accountability can Sudan move from the devastation of war to the promise of peace.

melshibly@hotmail.com